TC4 Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Found this on KFFL this morning about the Jets new signing: Jets | McGlockton Won't Be Ready by Training Camp - from www.KFFL.com Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:04:08 -0700 The Bergen Record reports New York Jets DT Chester McGlockton will not be ready to practice when training camp begins Monday, July 21. According to Jets head coach Herman Edwards, McGlockton has not been in an off-season program in over 2 months. Hehehe, let's hope he has been sitting on his big fat butt eating Bon-Bons and drinking Yoo Hoo :jetssuck: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Brown #43 Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 If this comes as a surprise to the Jets, they haven't been doing their homework. That guy's been a lazy, fat tub of goo since he came into the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Any guesses on what his current weight is? The over-under has to be 400. I'll give the Jets FO marginal credit (why, I don't know) that they wouldn't have signed him if he was over 380. I'll say 375. Of course, maybe he's 420 and the Jets are so desperate they didn't even bother hoisting him on the scale.:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Oh, I'm sure Flow will be around soon to set us straight on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. D Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 "over/under" on Chesters' weight....thats good. The front office of the Jets .........nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 I'm saying 345 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. D Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 420 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OURYEAR#56 Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Why didn't we get this guy. We're 2.4 under the cap, and only have 3 draft picks to sign. He's not lazy. He had 64 tackles last year as a DT. Thats a hell of a lot of tackles for a down line man. We really could have used him to collapse the pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Originally posted by Larry Brown #43 If this comes as a surprise to the Jets, they haven't been doing their homework. That guy's been a lazy, fat tub of goo since he came into the league. Clearly LB's been doing his homework since he knows that Chester's goo-like tubs of fat were hoisted on a Honolulu-bound cargo carrier 4 seasons in a row. My guess is that Chester weighs 360-370 depending on how much the zookeeper feeds him that day, and that he'll be a shade under 350 to start the season. I don't know about you, but I've never liked going against those Pat Williams, Ted Washington types the Bills have had - it seems even when they're out of shape, they just fall down at the LOS and create a lane-clogging roadblock of flesh. As I mentioned before, after the vet exemption and Rule of 51, Chester's net charge is about $100K, so we know there was little to lose. But that begs the question, why was the leading tackler on a DL that ranked 4th against the run cut in the 1st place, and more curiously, why didn't anyone else take him up until now? The answer to the first question is clear - the Broncos cleared $6M in cap space by releasing the fat tub of goo and used this money to upgrade the position with former Skin DT, Gardener. The answer to the second question is less clear. Reportedly, Chester was being courted by a number of teams and interest was mounting - so it's not as though nobody noticed his availability. But the real answer is that McGlockton is overweight (even fatter and gooier than this past winter), has had motivational questions, is aging, and can no longer be the centerpiece of a DL. He's not a good fit as a 16-game starter for the vast majority of teams, and at this point in his career, he didn't want to be riding the bench. But IMO, he is a solid fit for the Jets. Aside from the obvious - Evans' departure - it's a match due to Cottrell's trademark DL rotation that will keep the big man fresh, additional DL depth in place (especially with Evans expected return), Edwards' abilities as a motivator to keep a fire under the beast, veteran hand-holding next to Robertson, and Cottrell's need for a widebody NT next to a 3-tech. Throw in the GM's familiarity with Chester from their KC days to ease the courting process and you've got yourself a deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Flow, that was beautiful, man. I've no idea what your job is, but I think you have a future being the spin-meister for some political organization. Your take on this was arguably correct, but spun to the best possible degree. You're a true master. :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Originally posted by OURYEAR#56 Why didn't we get this guy. We're 2.4 under the cap, and only have 3 draft picks to sign. He's not lazy. He had 64 tackles last year as a DT. Thats a hell of a lot of tackles for a down line man. We really could have used him to collapse the pocket. he doesn't have the drive anymore and is 400 lbs, he was contemplating retirement so it is hard to trust somone like that. I would rather have young guys who want to make a name for themselves, they are hungrier (well chester is hungrier but another way :rotflmao: ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 Originally posted by SonnyJ Flow, that was beautiful, man. I've no idea what your job is, but I think you have a future being the spin-meister for some political organization. Your take on this was arguably correct, but spun to the best possible degree. You're a true master. :notworthy I second that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 I don't know about you, but I've never liked going against those Pat Williams, Ted Washington types the Bills have had - it seems even when they're out of shape, they just fall down at the LOS and create a lane-clogging roadblock of flesh. (Gritting my teeth) I agree, flow. I've never understood the contention that so-and-so's too fat to play DT. (Now, "out of shape" I'd believe could be a problem). I've always thought that the job of a DT is to get in the way. If he can tie up two blockers, then the two blockers are in the way, too. (If he can move the pile a yard or two backwards, that's even better. There are other refinements, like sticking up his arm at the right time, but they're not essential.) BTW, Y'know, if you'd posted that piece under another name, and then claimed that it was really written by The Infamous Flowtrain, I think you could've made some money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 All right, I'll do it: I hate that guys born with NFL bodies AND talent find those gifts so damned easy to waste. I would KILL to be 6'5" and able to carry 350 ... and oh yeah also be able to run a sub-5.0 40 and rush the passer and tackle RB's and generally compete against the most outrageous athletes the world has ever produced. I would kiss the damn ground every day I woke up and remembered "HOLY ****, I PLAY SPORTS AND THEY PAY ME SICK MONEY FOR IT!" On the other hand, I guess I could just coast for a few years, do just enough to make a few rosters, make a few million along the way, then retire at 35 and sit on my porch for the rest of my life suckin' down beer and hot dogs and braggin' on my time in the sun. Goddamit. I hate unmotivated professional athletes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJWatson3 Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 om, that burns me too... everytime i see someone who is incredibly tall (basketball), or tall and heavy (football), i wonder... "why isn't so-and-so playing pro sports?" what i would give to have the body to compete. i used to play HS ball in the Penninsula District (arguably the toughest in VA). i was a 5'10" 160lb. offensive "quick" guard. i did what i could, but going up against guys 6'2" and over 300lbs was tough. these guys that have been blessed with the size, but waste the opportunity make me sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 16, 2003 Share Posted July 16, 2003 the Jets were desperate because of Robertson's status and needed to fill a spot at DT with a body. fans of the Jets here are correct that it is a low risk gamble for the team, but it does point up how the front office still believes the 'impregnable' Jets D still has some fine tuning to undergo before their 16-0 run starting in September begins :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Originally posted by Om Goddamit. I hate unmotivated professional athletes. This brings to mind Earl "The Goat" Manigault, widely believed to be one of the worst examples of untapped potential in American sports. I'm not sure whether it's just a local legend up here or if his legacy transcends NY, though I'm pretty sure there are books and movies about him. He's reported to have regularly schooled the likes of Kareem and The Pearl on the Harlem playgrounds. By the worst accounts, he easily had All-Star talent and by the best accounts, could've been one of the best basketball players ever. Instead, he threw it all away on drugs. http://www.ndaadunk.com/earlmanigault.com/earls_biography.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. D Posted July 17, 2003 Share Posted July 17, 2003 Sidd Finch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted July 23, 2003 Share Posted July 23, 2003 For those wondering about McGlockton's size... For perspective, the man in the background laughing at the size of Chester's ass is 6'3", 310 pound Jason Ferguson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 23, 2003 Share Posted July 23, 2003 What do you list him as on the injury chart for missing training camp? I mean, I've seen people miss camp with torn hamstrings, bruised shoulders and even the "I'm Bruce Smith, don't like camp," thing, but, I've never seen he's too fat to practice work before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowtrain Posted July 23, 2003 Share Posted July 23, 2003 Good point. Sometimes the injury report just lists the appropriate body part in parentheses. McGlockton (gut). :mmm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RTerps2002 Posted July 23, 2003 Share Posted July 23, 2003 I don't see how anyone can have faith in Dan Wilkenson? He has never been the player McGlocton was last year no matter what hios weight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMac Posted July 23, 2003 Share Posted July 23, 2003 Is that a Raiders shirt that McGlocton is wearing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted July 23, 2003 Share Posted July 23, 2003 Jason Ferguson: "Dayum! One of those butt cheeks is as big as I am! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.